Planning Commission Minutes 2018 02 08

Home Browse Search

Planning Commission Meeting Minutes Page 6 of 23 development. She added that they had not gotten any additional views, as the only policy question was on visibility from across the street and that was the only one they asked the applicant to address graphically. She reiterated that three stories were considered to be appropriate and the application was meeting the other measurable standards. She added that subjectivity from the public comment was mixed. Staff finds that it fit well with the overall context of downtown. Rice moved to include in the record the emails that were added after the packet. Hsu seconded. Voice vote. Motion passed unanimously. Rice stated that, in general, the public comments against the application stated that the development was just too big. He asked Dean to respond to this concern. Dean stated that staff had to analyze the application from a technical perspective, as subjective measures such as "too big" were gray. She reiterated that the development was a change for Louisville that everyone involved wanted to consider carefully. She stated that the applicant revised the original application based on staff comments to meet more policies and the applicant was responsive in reducing floor area and bringing the building in. From staff's perspective it finds within the defined parameters that were definable. From a technical aspect it fits. Rice asked about the setback on the building at 908 Main Street. He also asked about the height of the Mercantile Building. Dean stated that staff did not have building permit records for the Mercantile Building as it was an old building. Rice asked about the height of the Melting Pot/Black Diamond structure. Dean stated that 908 Main was setback 15 feet and the Boulder Building proposal included a setback of 50 feet. Rice asked about the setback on the Zucca building second -story development that had come before the Commission a few months ago. Hsu asked staff to define what "pedestrian -scale" buildings meant in the guidelines. Zuccaro stated that it meant something different to everyone, but in Historic Downtown it generally meant 1-2 story buildings, wide sidewalks, and no parking in front of the building. Glazing, recessed doorways, and materials of buildings all play into a friendly pedestrian scale. Hsu asked why the application had been brought before the Historic Preservation Commission. Dean responded that HPC was a referral agency and staff asked them to review the existing Boulder Creek buildings as at least one of them was over 50 years old. Hsu asked if HPC made any motion or findings. Dean stated that HPC did not come to consensus. Their process was more to gather comments. The Commission reviewed the application early on in the review process. The applicant has amended the application since HPC saw it. Hsu asked if there was any objective measure for evaluating whether a building was representative of its time and place.